I don't know if Qt would work, but it is generally speaking the most highly 
regarded cross-platform GUI toolkit. Until recently there was only a 
commercial license for Qt on Windows. That has changed. The current Qt 
license is GPL.

I'm not completely sure how Qt's GPL would play with Csound's LGPL.

Regards,
Mike


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "schwaahed" 
To: ; 
Sent: Monday, May 01, 2006 5:55 PM
Subject: Re: [Csnd] Standalone FLTK exe's from Lettuce


On 5/1/06, Victor Lazzarini  wrote:
> My suggestion: I would not waste my time trying
> to get FLTK to work on a multi-threaded application.
> It will most likely fail (esp on Windows).

Is there a crossplatform toolkit that *would* work for a
csound based multithreaded application on Linux, Windows
and OSX?

Not that Lettuce should should switch, but for those of us
that are thinking about writing other frontends for csound.

schwaahed
-- 
Send bugs reports to this list.
To unsubscribe, send email to csound-unsubscribe@lists.bath.ac.uk

Michael Gogins wrote:

> I don't know if Qt would work, but it is generally speaking the most highly 
> regarded cross-platform GUI toolkit.

I don't believe that this is true. Qt, being written in C++ is
rather difficult to bind with other languages.

For cross platform applications written in C, Ocaml, Python, Perl,
C# (yes, the same C# language that company from Seattle is pushing) 
and others, GTK+ is much more commonly used and much better 
supported [0]. C++ bindings for GTK+ also exist.

> I'm not completely sure how Qt's GPL would play with Csound's LGPL.

GTK+ is LGPL.

Erik

[0] : I am currently in the process of writing a GUI app in Ocaml
      using the GTK+ bindings. Once its working this application
      should run on Linux and windows (not sure about MacOSX) with 
      nothing more than a recompile.
-- 
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
  Erik de Castro Lopo
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
"C++ is the only current language making COBOL look good."
-- Bertrand Meyer

LGPL is "GPL compatible" but I am not completely sure what that means for
distribution.  You do always have the option with LGPL code to distribute it
under the GPL instead, but then that "copy" is forever relicensed under the
GPL.

Regarding the earlier discussion of a license for Lettuce:  it is not
required to be open source as long as it links to a shared library Csound
and will not "break" if the user substitutes their own Csound library (with
compatible interface).

I personally believe though that it is to everyone's benefit to keep
software that interface's with Csound open source.  We have already "lost" a
number of very good front-ends and score generators because they were only
distributed as binaries and cannot be updated to work with newer versions of
Csound.


Anthony Kozar
anthonykozar AT sbcglobal DOT net

 
Erik de Castro Lopo wrote on 5/1/06 10:55 PM:

> Michael Gogins wrote:

>> I'm not completely sure how Qt's GPL would play with Csound's LGPL.
> 
> GTK+ is LGPL.

I have no problem with making lettuce open source, apart from the 
embarrassment that'll follow when people start looking through my code!

Rory.

Anthony Kozar wrote:
> LGPL is "GPL compatible" but I am not completely sure what that means for
> distribution.  You do always have the option with LGPL code to distribute it
> under the GPL instead, but then that "copy" is forever relicensed under the
> GPL.
> 
> Regarding the earlier discussion of a license for Lettuce:  it is not
> required to be open source as long as it links to a shared library Csound
> and will not "break" if the user substitutes their own Csound library (with
> compatible interface).
> 
> I personally believe though that it is to everyone's benefit to keep
> software that interface's with Csound open source.  We have already "lost" a
> number of very good front-ends and score generators because they were only
> distributed as binaries and cannot be updated to work with newer versions of
> Csound.
> 
> 
> Anthony Kozar
> anthonykozar AT sbcglobal DOT net
> 
>  
> Erik de Castro Lopo wrote on 5/1/06 10:55 PM:
> 
>> Michael Gogins wrote:
> 
>>> I'm not completely sure how Qt's GPL would play with Csound's LGPL.
>> GTK+ is LGPL.
>